Speaking in the Senate, the outspoken senator questioned the legality and transparency of the deal with Giesecke & Devrient, alleging that the entire process was secretive and failed to follow Kenya's procurement laws.
The senator insisted that the tendering process lacked the necessary oversight and was awarded without the legally required open competition.
He pointed out that the Auditor-General had already flagged major irregularities in the deal, including the failure to appoint a special procurement committee.
Omtatah has now tasked the Senate's Finance and Budget Committee with interrogating the matter fully to determine if due process was followed.
The Central Bank of Kenya has defended its decision to award the contract without an open tender, citing approvals it received from the National Security Council and the Treasury.
The banking regulator argued that national security concerns justified the need for single-sourcing the sensitive task of printing the nation's currency. This defence, however, has been strongly contested by the senator.
Auditor-General's reports from 2024 confirm that the CBK failed to comply with several key provisions of the law.
The audit questioned the lack of oversight from the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) and the failure to form a special procurement committee, which is a mandatory step for classified procurements.
These oversight gaps, according to the audit, cast serious doubt on whether the deal was in the best interest of Kenyan taxpayers.
Senator Omtatah directly challenged the CBK’s justification, firmly stating that the regulator is not a national security organ and therefore cannot use security as a reason to avoid open competition.
He reminded the House that in 2005, the country saved a significant amount of money when a similar tender was awarded through an open, transparent process.
He questioned why the CBK opted for a more expensive single-sourced route when a cheaper, competitive alternative was available.
0 Comments